Daniel Searson , Giulio Ponte , T Paul Hutchinson, Robert Anderson, Mary Lydon

1. Daniel Searson, Giulio Ponte, T Paul Hutchinson, Robert Anderson, Mary Lydon Centre for Automotive Safety Research, University of Adelaide, South Australia Emerging vehicle safety technologies and their potential benefits: Discussion of expert opinions16th October 2015

2. Introduction • A study funded by the RACV: • Literature review of emerging vehicle safety technologies • Consultation with experts • Analysis of the two most effective technologies identified in reducing serious and fatal injures in Australia RACV Research Report 14/03 University of Adelaide

3. Participants The experts interviewed: University of Adelaide

4. Interview Questions Of the safety technologies that are being introduced into new vehicles in the next 5 to 10 years, which do you think are likely to have the greatest impact on road deaths and injuries? For each Safety Technology: • Timeframe (until expected benefit) • Accelerating the uptake • Limitations and potential negative impacts • Infrastructure requirements • Impediments to adoption Longer term technologies University of Adelaide

5. Results – expert responses Technologies mentioned more than once • Autonomous emergency braking (AEB) • Vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications • Driver drowsiness/fatigue, distraction, or failure of concentration: detection and warning/intervention • Alcohol interlocks • Adaptive/advanced cruise control University of Adelaide

6. Results – expert responses Technologies mentioned more than once • Warning/intervention (lane keeping/departure, blind spot, speed relative to speed limit, reverse collision systems) • Advanced lighting systems • Autonomous vehicles • Autonomous braking when reversing • Automatic collision notification • V2P: Vehicle-to-pedestrian communication systems • Night-vision University of Adelaide

7. Results – expert responses Technologies mentioned just once • Feedback on risky behaviours and environments • Vehicle prognostics (avoiding breakdowns in bad places) • Better awareness of road and traffic conditions • Seat belt interlocks • Advanced whiplash protection • Pedestrian airbags • Rear seat safety • Cap or hat that protects a pedestrian’s head • Technologies to reduce occupants’ rotational head injury University of Adelaide

8. Timeframe until measureable benefit Interpreted differently by experts: • Immediate benefit for those who purchase cars with the technology • Market penetration of previous technologies (eg. ESC) might be a guide to future benefit of emerging vehicle technologies. • Technologies like AEB are already here, and are filtering through from Europe and EuroNCAP ‘requirements’ • Benefits of AEB may come through quicker with NCAP requirements • V2X technologies less certain 2-10 years? University of Adelaide

9. Accelerating uptake • Government regulation • Increased action by consumer advocacy groups (NCAP’s) • Better consumer awareness • Increased supporting of new vehicle assessment programs • Financial incentives • Insurance premium reductions • Reductions in vehicle registration costs • Retrofitting possible with warning systems Allianz Australia 20% discount for the Subaru Eyesight system (Subaru, 2012) NRMA Insurance 20% discount for the Volvo City Safety system (Blackburn, 2009). University of Adelaide

10. Limitations & potential negative impacts • Technical limitations (eg. Sensor types and range for AEB) • System reliance on GPS accuracy (e.g., for V2V, ISA) • Systems may be limited to certain ideal conditions (fine weather, daylight, sealed roads, no sudden impositions etc.) • Systems imperfect • Human characteristics: (eg. drowsiness, fatigue, inattention) are behaviours that are complex to predict. • Warning systems: too many false positives, the driver may become ignore the signal, or even switch off the technology if annoying University of Adelaide

11. Limitations & potential negative impacts • The human machine interface (HMI): drivers must be able to understand various safety systems and then acknowledge, interpret and react correctly. • Information overload: bombarding drivers with information, warnings and false detections that may divert driver attention from the primary task of driving. • Overreliance on the various technologies or complacency was also highlighted as a potential issue • People may push the boundaries of these devices once they become familiar with them (i.e. risk homeostasis). • Hacking of V2V and V2I systems was mentioned as a danger in addition to privacy concerns regarding wireless communications. University of Adelaide

12. Infrastructure requirements • For V2V and V2I communications infrastructure very important • Road infrastructure will need to broadcast to and receive information from vehicles • Some ADAS needs ideal infrastructure • Improved lighting • Good delineation markings (LDW/LKA) • Consistent signage University of Adelaide

13. Impediments to adoption Cost • Safety technologies often found on higher spec. or luxury cars • Not accessible by society in general • Too many vehicle types, market very price sensitive, safety features removed for economic reasons or optional extra V2X • Need consistent communication protocols • Accuracy of GPS systems in Australia need to improved Public Awareness • Consumers need to be more aware of what safety technologies they need University of Adelaide

14. Safety technologies, longer term Within 20 – 30 years: • Autonomous driving technologies (partial or full) • Perhaps only where there is well defined traffic (highways) • Partial autonomous systems arriving soon eg. Volvo systems that steer, brake and accelerate up to 50 km/h, platooning • V2X technologies, perhaps part of a holistic autonomous system • Un-crashable cars, no people killed on the road • Not all experts optimistic about driver-less cars • Human driver should always be able to take control • Who is liable if a crash occurs? Manufacturer or Vehicle owner? University of Adelaide

15. Other points raised Within 20 – 30 years: • Narrower lanes and increased road capacity might be achievable with driverless vehicles • Car travel may diminish with cheap air travel • Vehicle insurance costs may be linked to driver behaviour • Vehicle ownership may change, eg car sharing • Technology might adapt to personal characteristics (eg. Seatbelts for elderly or children) University of Adelaide

16. Conclusions Overall AEB was considered to have the greatest potential in reducing Fatalities and Serious Injuries in Australia V2V and V2I technologies were also highly rated There was also optimism about many other technologies We also share the optimism of the experts University of Adelaide

17. University of Adelaide

18. Annual Number of Road fatalities ~ 1000 Annual cost of fatal road crashes ~ $25 Billion A fully deployed safety system ~ 20% effective at reducing fatalities Every year that we don’t have that fully deployed safety system ~ 200 people die on the roads ~ $5 Billion annual cost University of Adelaide

19. Acknowledgments The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the RACV and Nicholas Platt the project manager and all the experts who contributed to the the project. The Centre for Automotive Safety Research is supported by both the South Australian Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure and the South Australian Motor Accident Commission. University of Adelaide